Apple absolutely definitely doing something, quite possibly, we think

The latest newsrumor is that Apple has slashed orders for iPhone 5 components, signaling that “sales of the new iPhone haven’t been as strong as previously anticipated and demand may be waning,” the Wall Street Journal reported. In fact, the Cupertino tech giant ordered roughly half as many phone screens as it had previously planned, the newspaper said, citing people familiar with the situation.

The predictable media pile on ensued, with no fewer than 55 other sites weighing in — and those were just the ones that earned links on industry news aggregator TechMeme. Apple’s stock drifted down 3.6 percent on the news.

At least one publication quickly attempted to shoot holes in the report, closely following the tech media template for Apple coverage.

The Journal story followed, and initially included figures from, an earlier article in Japan’s Nikkei also saying orders had been cut in half. But it specified that Apple originally planned to procure about 65 million iPhone 5 screens during the January to March quarter.

Tech blog BGR pointed out that, even if that figure included iPod Touch screens, it would be an awfully big number considering Apple only sold some 52 million iPhones of all types during the hot holiday quarter.

“In what world did Apple expect to order components for 65 million iPhone 5 handsets in the seasonally soft March quarter?” it wrote.

Prominent Apple blogger John Gruber seemed to agree, noting in a Tweet: “65m is insane, considering current record is 37m.”

The Twitter account for the New York Times technology blog posted a link to the BGR story and also splashed some cold water on the original reports: “There are no answers here, but loads of provocative questions about the stories of weakness in Apple.”

At this point, it’s difficult to know what to make of the competing assessments, an all-too familiar feeling when it comes to Apple coverage.

One of two things has happened in the reporting on this story. Either publications are giving too much credit to sources that aren’t actually all that “familiar with the matter,” or folks are reading too much into figures that might or might not be right.

It may be that the 52 million estimate represented soft holiday sales that convinced Apple to alter its original plan. Or maybe Apple is cutting orders to some degree, but Nikkei’s 65 million figure is just plain wrong (and perhaps that’s why the Journal dropped the figure from a later version of its story).

All that’s really clear is that not much is really clear. And that’s like déjà vu all over again.

I’m reminded of the old saying about advertising: Half the money spent is wasted, you just can’t know which half.

Some of these stories were spot on accurate, the result of dogged reporting and tireless source building. Unfortunately, it’s increasingly hard to know which ones.

Part of what we’re witnessing is the messy but ultimately constructive back and forth that occurs in the media, as journalists float arguments and counterarguments that eventually help us all arrive at something like the truth.

But too much of it reflects less noble traits in the tech press today: A readiness to report half baked rumors on flimsy sourcing. And an eagerness to slam, question or contradict your competitors, even if you haven’t bothered with a similar level of shoe-leather reporting.

Added up and it means two things: a whole lot of page views and a big disservice to readers.

9 Responses

I doubt that this is a case of weak reporting. More likely it is an attempt at stock price manipulation.

The scumbags who attempt to make big money by manipulating stock prices know that Apple’s quarterly earnings call with analysts is coming up next week. They know that investors won’t want to be caught owning the stock if Apple is going to badly miss projections. They also know that Apple bloggers are going to amplify and broadcast sensational rumors of this type.

When an article like this hits the wire, investors must quickly decide whether the rumors are real or a hoax. A number of them are sure to go to the sidelines rather than take a chance that the rumors are valid. This is why the stock dropped so much in price today. It’s the uncertainty created by the article.

The Wall Street Journal has a reputation to uphold. I don’t think they should have run this article without rock solid confirmation.

Let’s not jump to the ultimate tin-hat conclusion here, dave. Regardless of the root cause, the point here is that there is a media feeding frenzy on anything Apple, good or bad. But something that might be indicative, not matter how specious or unsubstantiated, of a massive change in the fortunes of Apple simply brings out the worst in reportage: everyone wants to be the outlet that 1st signalled the King is dead (or has a very short-term and highly inconsequential slight cold). Every sniffle is turned into a End Days scenario.

The cause of this is nothing more than multiple outlets simply re-hashing and quoting other equally clueless outlets, all the rush to drive web traffic. It drives web traffic, which then drives more traffic. It’s stuck in a self-created go-to loop.

Now that the tech industry itself has had a few shakeouts and the weaker elements have faded from memory, the next shakeout will be in the tech media. For far too long you’ve had way too many folks who really know nothing other than what they are told (3rd, 4th, 5th hand) and merely regurgitate it in search of click counts. Eventually, they’ll join the long list of also-rans of yesterday’s hot trends.

I think Apple has hit their peak. Every year there’s a new iPhone on the market with minimal enhancements. At some point, customers are going to get bored with a yearly product, which I think that’s happening now.

Has anyone considered that in the past the intermediate iterations of iPhones used the same screen as it’s main line platform. The 3GS had the same screen tech as the 3G. The 4S had the same as the 4. I’m wondering if a reduction of orders of the screens seen in today’s iPhone 5 is an indicator that the next iPhone (5S maybe?) will use an entirely different screen. For me, touch sensitivity on the 5 seems to be ‘off’ from time to time when compared to the 4 and 4S. Maybe they are breaking stride and improving screen technology on this next hardware release…

when is the SEC going to monitor such biased reporting? It is absurd that 20-25 year olds with no knowledge of facts are able to post reports on supposed credible real business news reporting sites…Even CNBC looks riduculous at times..Seldom do they come back later and say sorry, i had that one way wrong..hahaha…